← Teams

SJRC-Plank/Soucy

2023 Adult 18 & Over · 4.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 3.78 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.50 estimated across 8 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

4.01
Emilee Plank
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
3.73
Allison Fryman
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4
3.68
Megan Soucy
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.49
Angelina Warriner
usually #1 Doubles 47%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.36
Stephanie Haas
usually #1 Singles 36%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 3.5
3.33
Karen Barks
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
3.25
Jing Feng
usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #3 Doubles 44% · published 3.5
—
Yanchen Qi
usually #2 Singles 56%, also #1 Singles 22% · published 3.5
3.17
Paula Watt
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Results8 ties
2023-03-26Split 2–2
W#1 DoublesEmilee Plank / Angelina Warriner vs Julie Brown / Mary Lowblad4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKatherine Weinfurter / Jing Feng vs Monica Rivares / Jessica Miller2-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 SinglesYanchen Qi vs Loo Yah Leong6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesJennifer Witty / Allison Fryman vs Kate Leatherbarrow / Laura Maginnis6-2, 6-3
2023-03-18Lost 0–4
L#1 DoublesStephanie Haas / Megan Soucy vs Laura Luthi / Geraldine Carter6-3, 6-3
L#1 SinglesEmilee Plank vs Megan Meagher6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesYanchen Qi vs Pam Saftler6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesJing Feng / Jennifer Witty vs Terri Gotcher / June Kim6-2, 7-6
2023-03-04Lost 0–3
L#1 SinglesAngelina Warriner vs Zi Giotta4-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 SinglesYanchen Qi vs Carrie Willis6-4, 6-0
L#3 DoublesAllison Fryman / Stephanie Haas vs Julie Atchley / Jennifer Andrieu6-3, 6-4
2023-02-26Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMegan Soucy / Karen Barks vs Karen Dellinger / Angie Lee6-1, 6-4
L#1 SinglesEmilee Plank vs Kelly Mohr6-1, 6-2
L#2 DoublesStephanie Haas / Jing Feng vs Carla Wheeler / Ellen Mader6-1, 6-1
2023-02-18Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesMegan Soucy / Angelina Warriner vs Kristin Taylor / Jennifer Tran6-3, 6-4
W#1 SinglesAllison Fryman vs Kacie Wise0-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 SinglesYanchen Qi vs Sara van Beckum6-4, 6-4
2023-02-05Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesLydia Pia / Megan Soucy vs Holly Kanz / Danielle Cuenco1-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#2 SinglesAngelina Warriner vs Gina Ossanna5-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesKaren Barks / Paula Watt vs Tina Farrelly / Elizabeth Schwarz6-2, 6-4
2023-01-28Lost 0–2
L#2 DoublesEmilee Plank / Angelina Warriner vs Lisa Lyon / Cathy Porter6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesYanchen Qi vs Tara Hendrickson6-1, 6-1
2023-01-06Lost 0–5
L#1 DoublesLydia Pia / Megan Soucy vs Kristin de Baldo / Nikki Nadig6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesEmilee Plank vs Carrie Willis6-2, 6-0
L#2 DoublesStephanie Haas / Karen Barks vs Julie Atchley / Pamela Buckley6-2, 6-4
L#2 SinglesAllison Fryman vs Zi Giotta6-4, 6-0
L#3 DoublesPaula Watt / Angelina Warriner vs Heather Watkins / Mary Chennault6-1, 7-6
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits.

4.5
Emilee Plank
74W–48L career
12%88%0%
4.01
4
Allison Fryman
49W–24L career
3%97%1%
3.73
4
Megan Soucy
22W–39L career
4%96%0%
3.68
4
Angelina Warriner
91W–55L career
37%63%0%
3.49
3.5
Stephanie Haas
66W–82L career
0%98%2%
3.36
3.5
Karen Barks
35W–20L career
0%97%3%
3.33
3.5
Jing Feng
113W–80L career
1%99%0%
3.25
3.5
Yanchen Qi
29W–55L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Paula Watt
43W–47L career
15%82%2%
3.17

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.